Re: [RFC PATCH 00/17] virtual-bus

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 09:46:49AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
> I don't understand this.  If we had good interfaces, all that userspace  
> would do is translate guest physical addresses to host physical  
> addresses, and translate the guest->host protocol to host API calls.  I  
> don't see anything there that benefits from being in the kernel.
>
> Can you elaborate?

I think Greg has expressed it clearly enough.

At the end of the day, the numbers speak for themselves.  So if
and when there's a user-space version that achieves the same or
better results, then I will change my mind :)

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux